How about the New Yorker next?

typed for your pleasure on 9 September 2013, at 7.22 pm

Sdtrk: ‘I box 20’ by To kill a petty bourgeoisie

As I type this up, I can imagine regular readers of this godforsaken blog — all nine of you — seeing the title of this post, indignantly flinging their mug of coffee through the nearest window, and bellowing at their computer screen, ‘Oi Davecat! This isn’t “Let’s meet some of California’s Synthetik residents, Part II”, this is some other bunch of crap!’ Well, you aren’t wrong! Also, shame that you shattered your ‘World’s Greatest Dad’ mug; you’ll never be able to replace that.

This post has two purposes: one, to say Hello to the sudden influx of new readers. Hello! Please be seated.
The other purpose is to explain why I’ve got new readers in the first place: remember in the previous post how I’d mentioned that a reporter for a notable online news site wanted to interview me about my iDollator lifestyle? Well, Julie Beck of The Atlantic sent over a passel of questions via Email, and I replied with some thorough answers. Last Friday it was published, and you can read it here: Married to a Doll: Why One Man Advocates Synthetic Love.

Also, if more men do start “choosing the synthetic option,” as you say, and begin having relationships with objects that are shaped like women, do you think that will encourage the objectification of real women?

The belief that the existence of synthetics encourages the objectification of organic women is baseless. If anything, those of us who are iDollators or technosexuals find that it’s more a case of personifying objects. But then, 98 percent of the iDollators and technosexuals I know treat their Dolls like goddesses. I can’t really speak for those who don’t, and it would be safe to assume that those who would objectify an organic woman would’ve been practicing that behavior long before knowing about synthetics.

As I’d told Julie, I think it’s one of the top five favourite online interviews I’ve done, as it lacks any conjecture or bias! Which is the way reporting should be. Although I do wish that she’d have pointed out that Elena was made by Anatomical Doll; she’s not a RealDoll, like my Missus is. Not all Doll manufacturers are the same!
So do enjoy the additional reading material, and I’ll get back to writing about DolLApalooza 2013. Or getting in a couple more minutes hours with Suda51’s KILLER IS DEAD. You know how these things go.

Now I shall show you a photo of the Gynoid actress/personality Actroid-F (aka Geminoid-F), in lieu of ending this post in a responsible manner


‘Why the hell did I do that? I’m really gonna miss that coffee mug’

Random similar posts, for more timewasting:

Tonight, on an alternate-universe 'CSI' on September 8th, 2008

Stars in their Eyes, Part I on August 3rd, 2005

6 have spoken to “How about the New Yorker next?”

  1. bbbjjjttt writes:

    Really good interview and photos! I must say you look three sheets (and a pillowslip) to the wind in the first photo, which I know perfectly well you are not! But I digress. Another excellent interview, points made spot-on, arguments-against tactfully gutted. And you are so right about female iDollators and the WEIGHT ISSUE.

    Geminoid-F is adorable!

  2. Andy writes:

    That interview is a very good read and the pictures are lovely – with the girls in their strict colour scheme.

    It may be nice to have the interview on a kind of news-portal, where it gets more exposure, but it also has drawbacks as can be seen in the comments on that news-site.
    Again and again I decided to NOT look at any comments on high-traffic web sites (but sadly, curiosity often gets the better of me).
    The problem is that so many of the bitter and sad people, who probably have scared away any partner, they once might have had, now have the easy fix to go on-line to any site, where they can post comments, to spill their daily ration of acid there.
    I hope it doesn’t sound too patronising, but I hope you don’t take all that crap too personal, because I’m sure it isn’t: If the article would have told a story where a little kitten is saved from drowning by a three-legged blind puppy, the same people would have found a reason to be disgusted by it.

  3. Davecat writes:

    B-san —
    But I was drunk! Drunk with POWER! Well, Powerade. Okay, I don’t actually drink Powerade. I was simply filled with opium at the time of the photo.

    Thanks for the compliments! See, even if you didn’t know me personally, you’re a more critical thinker than most people out there. One has to gloss over the lowest common denominator sometimes, as one can’t restrict one’s vocabulary to monosyllabic words; it’s too time-consuming.

    Speaking of the weight issue: at this point, B., you have enough Synthetik companions of your own that they should be able to pick you up wherever and whenever you require it! Maybe it’s time for you to go palanquin-shopping. 🙂

    Andy (and sexpot Amy) —
    ‘The problem is that so many of the bitter and sad people, who probably have scared away any partner, they once might have had, now have the easy fix to go on-line to any site, where they can post comments, to spill their daily ration of acid there.’
    That is exactly it. A lot of detractors — detractors from anyone’s happiness, but I’m specifically referring to people who don’t like Synthetiks — have such withered imaginations and awful personalities that they can’t stand seeing anyone apart from themselves live in a better fashion than they are. It’s easier for most people to criticise or mock than to change themselves, and that’s what most online commentors do, sadly. Thankfully, commentors on ‘Shouting etc etc’ are by far a better class of individual! 🙂

    And danke for the advice, but I haven’t read online comments about Synthetiks, iDollators, technosexuals, or me since 2005. I’d learnt my lesson, and people who are curious and/or supportive will contact me directly, as opposed to talking about me on whatever media forum. I would almost bet money that less than 3% of the comments on the Atlantic article are constructive, supportive, nice, or even neutral. The rest are just bitter and small-minded armchair psychologists. Who needs that amount of shite in their life?
    I will say this, though: on rare occasions, I do peek at comments, and anything I find hateful makes me love Sidore and Elena that much more, so it works out well for everyone here!…

  4. Peter Synthetik & Miss July writes:

    I just wrote 1 hour long a reply and after posting it is gone !!??

  5. cta08052 writes:

    The article is really cool! What disturbs me is the hostility in the comments left…
    Woman get a vibrator; cool! Man uses a doll for play, fantasy, companionship…he’s mentally ill.
    What a narrow minded bunch of folks who commented.

    Best to you Dave, Sidore an Elena!

  6. Davecat writes:

    Herr und Frau Synthetik
    O crap, I’m sorry! 🙁 That’s actually happened to me a couple of times too; I honestly have no idea what causes that. And you wrote for an hour?? Damn, I’m really sorry. 🙁
    If it helps out in the future, what I’ve learnt from the times my own responses have disappeared is to Ctrl+C (Copy) what I wrote before I hit the Post button. That way, if the site freaks out, I’ll at least have it copied so I don’t have to type it all again! Or try to remember what I typed in the first place. 😐

    ctaseriesofnumbers —
    Unfortunately, it’s easier for most people to react rather than think, which is what animals do. Armchair psychologists not only don’t have any genuine idea why we iDollators have our silicone companions, but as the reasons are many and varied, they have zero interest in learning why. Shame, really, as I’m sure there are more than a few of them who would probably be happier with a Synthetik partner of their own, rather than being afraid of what others think of them…
    O well. Like I’d told Andy and Amy above, detractors are best ignored. Every minute spent thinking about them is a minute that could’ve been spent thinking about a Sinthetic, or a RealDoll, or an Anatomical Doll, or a Private Island Beauty, &c.

Leave a charming reply